Reading Sources

Partisan Pomp

Search

RSS & Atom feeds

Kill disabled babies?

ONE of Britain’s royal medical colleges is calling on the health profession to consider permitting the euthanasia of seriously disabled newborn babies.

The proposal by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecology is a reaction to the number of such children surviving because of medical advances. The college is arguing that “active euthanasia” should be considered for the overall good of families, to spare parents the emotional burden and financial hardship of bringing up the sickest babies.

“A very disabled child can mean a disabled family,” it says. “If life-shortening and deliberate interventions to kill infants were available, they might have an impact on obstetric decision-making, even preventing some late abortions, as some parents would be more confident about continuing a pregnancy and taking a risk on outcome.”

Geneticists and medical ethicists supported the proposal — as did the mother of a severely disabled child — but a prominent children’s doctor described it as “social engineering”. [Read]

Part of the argument here is not that life is not sacred, but that without the advancements in medical technology these babies would not have survived. As nature (God?) was not allowed to take its course and avert the birth of the severely disabled child, they want the ability to carry out nature's intentions. Perhaps medical ethicists should consider removing advancement in medicine completely and allow nature to take its course.

Hopefully those who would be adamantly opposed to doctors having to carry on the horrible practice of ending life early will be equally as adamantly opposed to the practice of doctors creating life.